Recognizing The Major Problems In The Environmental Movement

On Wednesday, Stream posted an article by a former environmentalist listing five reasons why he gave up “green policies.”

Here is the list:

Failed Climate Change Predictions

Science is about accurate prediction. If Newton’s theory had failed to predict how apples fall, then it would be useless.

Few scientists have been as bad at this (basic) job as climate scientists. In one of the most comical episodes I’ve ever seen, climate scientists erected signs in Glacier National Park predicting its glaciers would be gone in 2020 — only to be forced to leave the signs after the predictions proved false. For a year, tourists to the park were met with a monument to the legacy of climate science: They stood looking simultaneously at glaciers … and the sign that promised, on the good authority of climate science, that the glaciers were not there.

Where Did the Wild Spaces Go?

Thoreau said of nature: “We need the tonic of wildness.” Thoreau was right about me at least. One of my primary motives for being an environmentalist was that I believed natural wild spaces were good for the soul.

…And that brings us to wind farms. I hate wind farms. They kill birds and destroy forest habitats. The blades are made of materials that fill waste dumps and can’t be recycled. They require lithium batteries that have to be mined with methods that create the very kinds of problems the “clean energy” movement is supposed to solve.

Politics Over Facts

Speaking of facts: The relationship between science and politics only works when the causal arrow between them goes from scientific facts to politics.

Bullying Over Debate

One of the clear signs that a movement is rotten is when it resorts to silencing its opponents rather than debating them. The modern “green” movement contains the worst set of bullies I’ve ever seen; indeed, they serve as primary fodder for my forthcoming book called Liberal Bullies.

Lack of a Cost/Benefit Analysis

Even at the height of my pro-environmentalist sentiment, I wasn’t opposed to all oil drilling. I know we need energy; I use it every day. I just wanted moderation that purposefully preserved a significant amount of wild nature. Well, across the board, the green movement increasingly just bludgeons us with simple-minded ideas that ignore the obvious costs of their policies.

Keep in mind that list comes from someone who at one time supported the green energy movement. It’s time for the rest of the supporters of the movement to wake up.

 

The BRICS Agenda

The BRICS (razil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) agenda is not necessarily good news for America–it will mean the death of the American dollar. However, there are actually some good things about it. The BRICS countries are the only countries right now (with very few exceptions) that are willing to stand up to the economic plans of the World Economic Forum.

On July 9th, Elizabeth Nickson posted an article at Substack about the plans of the World Economic Forum.

The article reports:

Earlier this month in St. Petersburg, the BRICS — that is, the nations of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — met to consider the application of nineteen more countries to their number, and in two months they will gather against, in Durban, South Africa, with an eye towards laying out an alternative to the U.S. dollar’s dominion over world trade. Algeria, Egypt, Nigeria, Senegal, Sudan, Tunisia, and Zimbabwe, are among those applying to join BRICS. These countries are setting their face against western democracies and their death march into “climate change” degrowth and population reduction. They may save us yet.

That currency will be pegged to the natural resources possessed by each country. This critical shift will mean that financialization of each country’s resources will be unavailable to the world’s oligarchs, who today are acquiring land as fast as they can to set aside as carbon credits on the massive new taxes deemed necessary. The BRICS do not care about “climate change” or species extinction (which they know are based on a falsification of science), they care about growth and using their resources to give their people a better life. They do not want the World Economic Forum telling them what to do. When it comes to the Ukraine conflict, they are on Russia’s side.

The article includes the following quote:

The following is a quote from DeGrowth.org. Here’s a pre-translation: Break Everything That Works

Lastly, the ruptural mode of transformation involves halting, which is a confrontation with existing capitalist structures to the end of harm reduction (e.g. occupying a coal mine) and smashing, which is a break with existing structures (e.g. occupying and overtaking a production facility). Evidently, smashing can enable the strategic logic of building alternatives. Chertkovskaya cautions that rupturalmodes are to be applied deliberately to overcome capitalist structures in specific spatio-temporal contexts rather than in an attempt to overthrow the global capitalist system in one go.

This is a war on capitalism waged by people who are not willing to let anyone else acquire wealth.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is a wake-up call to those who believe the environmental movement is actually about the environment.

In Case You Were Worried About This…

Anthony Watts at wattsupwiththat is reporting today:

A new Policy Brief from The Heartland Institute shows there is no evidence of acceleration in the rise of global sea levels since the 1920s and concludes the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) concerns over this issue is “without merit.”

The Policy Brief, titled “Global Sea Level Rise: An Evaluation of the Data,” authored by Dr. Craig Idso, chairman of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Dr. David Legates, professor of climatology in the Department of Geography at the University of Delaware, and Dr. S. Fred Singer, is taken from a chapter of Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels, a report fromthe Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).

According to IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report, “it is very likely that the rate of global mean sea level rise during the 21st century will exceed the rate observed during 1971–2010 for all Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios due to increases in ocean warming and loss of mass from glaciers and ice sheets.”

However, Idso, Legates, and Singer argue “sea-level rise is a research area that has recently come to be dominated by computer models. Whereas researchers working with datasets built from long-term coastal tide gauges typically report a slow linear rate of sea-level rise, computer modelers assume a significant anthropogenic forcing and tune their models to find or predict an acceleration of the rate of rise.”

…Instead of accelerated sea-level rises, the authors find “the best available data” shows “evidence is lacking for any recent changes in global sea level that lie outside natural variation.” They point out that if the negative effects of the claimed accelerated rise in sea level, such as a loss of surface area, were to be visible anywhere, it would most likely be in the small islands and coral atolls in the Pacific Ocean. However, research indicates many of these islands and atolls are actually increasing in size. Simply, they are “not being inundated by rising seas due to anthropogenic climate change.”

Fears of an accelerated rise in sea levels caused by anthropogenic climate change are misplaced and overblown. Further, this fearmongering should not be used by policymakers in coastal states and cities to advocate for policies that would seek to limit or eliminate carbon dioxide emissions.

No, we are not all going to drown in five years because of sea-level rise. Some politicians are screaming ‘the sky is falling’ because they believe it will get them the votes of young people who are not scientifically schooled. The earth’s climate is cyclical, we are in a cycle. There will be another cycle. We need to do what we can to limit pollution, but in the end, we are not important enough to make a significant difference. Pride is one of the things the fuels the extreme environmental movement.

Ever Wonder About The People Who Create Holidays?

Townhall.com posted an article today about the founder of Earth Day. The man was seriously into composting.

The article reports:

Ira Einhorn was on stage hosting the first Earth Day event at the Fairmount Park in Philadelphia on April 22, 1970. Seven years later, police raided his closet and found the “composted” body of his ex-girlfriend inside a trunk.

A self-proclaimed environmental activist, Einhorn made a name for himself among ecological groups during the 1960s and ’70s by taking on the role of a tie-dye-wearing ecological guru and Philadelphia’s head hippie. With his long beard and gap-toothed smile, Einhorn — who nicknamed himself “Unicorn” because his German-Jewish last name translates to “one horn” —advocated flower power, peace and free love to his fellow students at the University of Pennsylvania. He also claimed to have helped found Earth Day.

Taking care of the earth is something we should all do every day. I suppose it is nice that we take one day a year and celebrate our home. However, like anything else, taking care of the earth has to be done in a way that respects all aspects of life.

I was at the aquarium with some of my granddaughters yesterday and picked up a book for young readers. It was pure propaganda. Rational human beings need to take over the environmental movement. so far that hasn’t happened.

 

A Natural Way To Curb The Danger Of Forest Fires

Before the days of radical environmentalism, forests were harvested and partially cleared by lumber companies. Since the lumber companies wanted to stay in business, in most cases they were careful to harvest the trees in a way that guaranteed to sustainability of the forest. Unfortunately, the radical part of the environmental movement has stopped not only the harvesting of trees, but the clearing out of the underbrush. As a result of this, we have seen horrible fires in the western states of America. Because the underbrush and dead trees have not been cleared, the forests have plenty of fuel to keep them going.

Well, there is a natural way to help prevent these massive forest fires–and it doesn’t even involve the use of carbon emitting machines.

In December of 2014, The Colorado Springs Independent posted an article about Lani Malmberg.

The article reports:

Though she’s currently on a 10-day contract to clear brush from Cedar Heights, she’s best known in these parts for 16 years of fall visits to Bear Creek Park, where her “employees” manage weeds in a more eco-friendly manner than commonly used machinery or chemicals. A visit to her EWE4IC Ecological Services website, goatseatweeds.com, begins with a Top 10 list of why goats rule in this manner. Among benefits: They aid in fire prevention while helping build healthy soil by tramping, aerating and fertilizing it, also making it more absorptive for water, combating runoff.

She uses border collies to herd the goats and keep them in line while they clear the underbrush. Although there would be nothing wrong with harvesting wood and clearing underbrush from our national forests (as long as new trees were planted), those efforts are being blocked by environmentalists (thus creating the situation which allows these massive wildfires we have been dealing with). Mrs. Malmberg provides an alternative that is natural and ecologically sound. This is one idea that I believe both the environmentalists and those who live near the forests should be willing to support.